It happened that, while travelling in behalf of the paper, he stopped at Detroit, Michigan, and attended a trial in the Supreme Court, Justice John McLean presiding, before whom Dr. Comstock, a gentleman of respectability and wealth, and others of that state, were arraigned on charge of aiding and abetting the escape of a family of blacks from Kentucky, known as the Crosswaits. In the case it had been proven satisfactorily that Dr. Comstock had nothing to do with their escape. Having heard of the affair (being two or three miles distant), he came to the scene of confusion just in time to hear the threats and regrets of the defeated slave-hunter, Crossman. The doctor stood there enjoying the discomfiture, and expressed himself to a friend that he hoped “they would not be overtaken.” For this Judge McLean ruled him guilty as an accomplice in the escape, stating that it was “the duty of all good citizens to do all they could to prevent it; that whether housing or feeding, supplying means or conveyances, throwing himself or other obstructions in the way, or standing quietly by with his hands in his breeches pockets, smiling consent, it was equally aiding and abetting, hindering and obstructing, in the escape of the slaves, and therefore such person was reprehensible before the law as a _particeps criminis_, and must be held to answer.” This novel decision of the judge of the Supreme Court was so _startling_ to him _at that time_--for, alas! decisions more wounding to the honor of the nation have since emanated from the Supreme Court--that he hastened to report to the North Star the proceedings of the trial, which he had taken down while sitting in the court-room. This publication, like a wronged and angry Nemesis, seemed to reach various points in time to be made available, especially by those attending the great Free Soil Convention at Buffalo. Everywhere was the infamous decision discussed with more or less warmth, according to the political creed of the debaters: then the reliability of the writer received some attention. The North Star may have been sufficient authority, had that correspondent who reported the McLean decision been Mr. Frederick Douglass, who had both “credit and renown.” While the initials of the undersigned could be known from the title page of the paper (as the full names of each appeared as editors and proprietors), “Who is he?” became the subject of inquiry among the throng of delegates, who could not be censured for not knowing but one black man of ability and character in the United States, and supposing it to be impossible that there should be more than one.